Dedalis v. Brown County Jail et al
ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 10/12/16 denying 16 Motion to Compel. Further ordering plaintiff to identify the Doe defendants or inform the court why he is unable to do so by November 14, 2016. If he does not, the court may dismiss his action based on his failure to diligently pursue it. (cc: all counsel, via USPS to plaintiff) (dm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
CHRISTOPHER T. DEDALIS,
Case No. 15-CV-1543
JOHN AND JANE DOES,
On April 29, 2016, I screened plaintiff’s second amended complaint and allowed
him to proceed on his claims against four Doe defendants. Because he did not know the
proper names of the defendants, I also ordered service of the second amended
complaint on Brown County Sheriff John Gossage, so that plaintiff could conduct limited
discovery to determine their proper names. Plaintiff was required to substitute the Does’
proper names by October 14, 2016, or explain why he was unable to do so.
On October 5, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion to compel. He explains that he mailed
limited discovery requests to Gossage’s attorney more than forty-five days ago, but he
received no response. He asks me to compel Gossage to respond to his requests.
Civil Local Rule 37 requires parties to first attempt to work out a discovery
dispute informally, amongst themselves, before involving the court. If that is
unsuccessful, a party may file a motion to compel, but the motion must include a
certification that efforts to informally resolve the dispute failed. This rule exists because
parties are often able to reach an agreement before involving the court, which saves
both the parties and the court time and resources.
Plaintiff’s motion to compel does not indicate if he tried to resolve this dispute
with Gossage’s attorney before he filed his motion, so I will deny his motion at this time.
The plaintiff should send a letter (or call, if he is able to) to Gossage’s counsel (Samuel
C. Hall, Jr., Crivello Carlson SC, The Empire Building, 710 N. Plankinton Ave., Suite
500, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2404) in an effort to address his concerns about his
unanswered requests. If that is unsuccessful, he may refile his motion. I expect the
parties will be able to work this out without my involvement.
In order to allow plaintiff sufficient time to contact Gossage’s counsel and obtain
the information he needs, I will extend the deadline by which he must file a motion to
submit the proper names for the Doe placeholders. Plaintiff must file such a motion—or
explain why he is unable to do so—by November 14, 2016.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to compel (Docket
#16) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff must identify the Doe defendants or
inform the court why he is unable to do so by November 14, 2016. If he does not, the
court may dismiss his action based on his failure to diligently pursue it.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 12th day of October, 2016.
s/ Lynn Adelman
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?